My mother's appointment with the urologist was this afternoon. The doctor was a young Egyptian, very knowledgeable with an outstanding manner. He delivered all the information in an understandable manner and waited for our decision. He did not rush nor did he try to persuade.

The information was all what we already knew and/or suspected. On the basis of two very clear CT Scans he is confident mother has clear cell renal cancer. It is a hard mass clearly distinguishable from the other cysts they found on her kidneys and which he says we all have.

Only a biopsy would give definitive results but he advises against the biopsy because of complications for my mother and for fear of spreading the cancer.

He has taken all the reports into consideration and has said my mother would have a very poor chance of surviving the operation to remove the tumor or her kidney.

The tumor is small, one inch in size, and has probably been growing for years. Most of these are discovered by accident, he said. They grow at a rate of between 1 and 3 mm a year.

What I had read online and had learned from my brother-in-law (a doctor) and from my nephew's wife (an internal medicine resident) was exactly what he said. The five year survival rate for the elderly with small tumors is better with "watch and wait" then with surgery.

With my mother's health, her dementia, her thyroid issues, her frailty and heart arrhythmia, and especially her COPD her chances of living another 5 years are extremely small anyway.

He wanted us to know, however, that if we decided on 'watch and wait' there was no turning back. If the cancer suddenly accelerated or metastasized they would deal with the issues as they came up but there would be no future attempt at an operation. They would deal with any pain. They might try to shrink spreading cancers with radiation but ...

There was no other decision to be made. Let's face it. The next bought with pneumonia will take her. Not eating will take her. I doubt she lives long enough for the cancer to kill her but even if she does the only alternative is an operation now she has little chance of surviving.

Wednesday, 8 July 2015

Billy Graham is now 96 years-old with Parkinson's disease. In January 2000 leaders in Charlotte , North Carolina invited their favorite son, Billy Graham, to a luncheon in his honor.

Billy initially hesitated to accept the invitation because he struggles with Parkinson's disease. But the Charlotte leaders said, 'We don't expect a major address. Just come and let us honor you.' So he agreed.

After wonderful things were said about him, Dr. Graham stepped to the rostrum, looked at the crowd, and said, "I'm reminded today of Albert Einstein, the great physicist who this month has been honored by Time magazine as the Man of the Century.

Einstein was once traveling from Princeton on a train when the conductor came down the aisle, punching the tickets of every passenger. When he came to Einstein, Einstein reached in his vest pocket. He couldn't find his ticket, so he reached in his trouser pockets.

It wasn't there. He looked in his briefcase but couldn't find it. Then he looked in the seat beside him. He still couldn't find it. "The conductor said, 'Dr. Einstein, I know who you are. We all know who you are. I'm sure you bought a ticket. Don't worry about it.'

"Einstein nodded appreciatively. The conductor continued down the aisle punching tickets. As he was ready to move to the next car, he turned around and saw the great physicist down on his hands and knees looking under his seat for his ticket.

"The conductor rushed back and said, 'Dr. Einstein, Dr. Einstein, don't worry, I know who you are; no problem. You don't need a ticket. I'm sure you bought one.'

Einstein looked at him and said, "Young man, I too, know who I am. What I don't know is where I'm going.”

Having said that Billy Graham continued, "See the suit I'm wearing? It's a brand new suit. My children, and my grandchildren are telling me I've gotten a little slovenly in my old age. I used to be a bit more fastidious. So I went out and bought a new suit for this luncheon and one more occasion. You know what that occasion is? This is the suit in which I'll be buried. But when you hear I'm dead, I don't want you to immediately remember the suit I'm wearing. I want you to remember this: I not only know who I am. I also know where I'm going.

I never doubted for a moment that the Supreme Court would reach any decision other than what they did. As far as I was concerned it was a foregone conclusion. That is not the news story today. The story is what this will bring out.

Those who are unable to see beyond tomorrows breakfast will see this decision as a good thing and there is nothing that will dissuade them from that idea. I do wish, however, that they had the foresight and the intelligence to look at society this morning and remember it when they look back two years from now at the destruction this decision will wreck on the country.

Already the barbarians are baying at the gates. The ink hasn't even dried on this decision and the push is on. There is a push to allow incestuous marriages, polyamorous marriages, polygamy, bigamy. The Neronic Agenda has always been to destroy the institution of marriage entirely and they have admitted such but just as liberals have kept their heads in the sand, or up their ass, about the danger of Islam even when Islam states their agenda, so these deluded fools have refused to accept the stated aims of the sodomites.

There is a reason that homosexuality has been called a civilization destroyer. One doesn't have to spend very much time in history books to see why.

On a faith note there are those that say that God will judge America for this perversion. They need to read their Bibles again. This is God's judgement.

Religion, faith, aside this is a horror. The SCOTUS invented law today. They created a right that did not exist. The courts are the new oligarchy.

If you thought that Roe vs Wade nearly destroyed America you have seen nothing yet.

I will be posting three more articles tomorrow. You need to read them.

If you are the type of shortsighted person who applauds this you need to stop. You need to think about this carefully.

Friday's Supreme Court decision redefining marriage in all 50 states to include same-sex couples will infringe upon the religious freedoms of those holding traditional views about marriage, dissenting justices warned.

While religious accommodations have been written into state laws redefining marriage, the U.S. Supreme Court did not, and could not, do that in claiming that gay marriage is a fundamental right; inevitably, this will lead to religious freedom conflicts, Chief Justice John Roberts wrote in his dissenting opinion.

"Unfortunately, people of faith can take no comfort in the treatment they receive from the majority today," he wrote. (For simplicity, footnotes have been removed from all quotes.)

While Justice Anthony Kennedy acknowledged in his majority opinion that religious conservatives have the right to "advocate" and "teach" their views, "ominously," Roberts continued, there was no mention of the freedom to live according to their beliefs.

"The First Amendment guarantees, however, the freedom to 'exercise religion.' Ominously, that is not a word the majority uses," he wrote.

"Religious liberty is about more than just the protection for 'religious organizations and persons ... as they seek to teach the principles that are so fulfilling and so central to their lives and faiths,'" he wrote. "Religious liberty is about freedom of action in matters of religion generally, and the scope of that liberty is directly correlated to the civil restraints placed upon religious practice."

Religious colleges and adoption agencies could lose their tax-exempt status for upholding norms consistent with their faith, Roberts noted, while citing the oral arguments of the Obama administration's solicitor general.

"Hard questions arise when people of faith exercise religion in ways that may be seen to conflict with the new right to same-sex marriage — when, for example, a religious college provides married student housing only to opposite-sex married couples, or a religious adoption agency declines to place children with same-sex married couples," he wrote.

Worse still, Roberts continued, Kennedy used language demeaning those who disagree with him, which will have consequences for their religious freedom.

"Perhaps the most discouraging aspect of today's decision is the extent to which the majority feels compelled to sully those on the other side of the debate.

"The majority offers a cursory assurance that it does not intend to disparage people who, as a matter of conscience, cannot accept same-sex marriage. That disclaimer is hard to square with the very next sentence, in which the majority explains that 'the necessary consequence' of laws codifying the traditional definition of marriage is to 'demea[n] or stigmatiz[e]' same-sex couples. The majority reiterates such characterizations over and over.

"By the majority's account, Americans who did nothing more than follow the understanding of marriage that has existed for our entire history — in particular, the tens of millions of people who voted to reaffirm their States' enduring definition of marriage — have acted to 'lock ... out,' 'disparage,' 'disrespect and subordinate,' and inflict '[d]ignitary wounds' upon their gay and lesbian neighbors.

"These apparent assaults on the character of fair minded people will have an effect, in society and in court. Moreover, they are entirely gratuitous. It is one thing for the majority to conclude that the Constitution protects a right to same-sex marriage; it is something else to portray everyone who does not share the majority's 'better informed understanding' as bigoted," he wrote.

Justice Samuel Alito also warned that the decision will be used to "vilify" and "marginalize" Americans who believe in traditional marriage. Comparing traditional marriage supporters to racists and misogynists will be particularly damaging.

"In the course of its opinion, the majority compares traditional marriage laws to laws that denied equal treatment for African-Americans and women. The implications of this analogy will be exploited by those who are determined to stamp out every vestige of dissent," he wrote.

Traditional marriage supporters will likely hold their views privately, fearing the dire consequences that could result from speaking out, Alito continued.

"I assume that those who cling to old beliefs will be able to whisper their thoughts in the recesses of their homes, but if they repeat those views in public, they will risk being labeled as bigots and treated as such by governments, employers, and schools," he wrote.

Like Roberts, Alito wrote that if the definition of marriage had been left to the states, the states could have included religious conscience protections, but taking that decision out of the hands of the deliberative lawmaking bodies means that contentious religious freedom battles lie ahead.

"By imposing its own views on the entire country, the majority facilitates the marginalization of the many Americans who have traditional ideas. Recalling the harsh treatment of gays and lesbians in the past, some may think that turnabout is fair play. But if that sentiment prevails, the Nation will experience bitter and lasting wounds," he wrote.

Monday, 15 June 2015

I am sitting on the front patio (it is too hot out on the new deck in back) and about to open my second Keith's. The Guinness I bought yesterday can age a little longer in the fridge.

I thought it best that if I were to blog I do it before I crack that second beer because as any beer drinker can tell you - two beer lead to three and three to four. Before you know it I won't be able to hit the keys on the keyboard.

It has been a reasonably quiet day. I got my walking in early this morning, went to the top of the hill to check on my old folks, took Tess and Nanay to Walmart for a quick shop (and yes, Virginia, it really was quick), and then hurried home. I was tempted to walk again but then this swing called me so I grabbed the book de jour and have been sitting out here reading.

This subdivision is quiet these days. When I first bought a house here years ago there were hundreds of yard apes and it was a noisy place. Now the yard apes have grown, moved away, and have their own yard apes now. It is just us old farts in the neighborhood now. There are a few cars on the streets as people come home from work but it is reasonably quiet. Somewhere someone has a skill saw running and I can hear Tess in the house talking to her sister in Pampanga on Skype.

Of course reasonably isn't as quiet as I would like. I am a deep country boy and would prefer to live where there is no noise at all. I have lived there before and would love to again but barring a lottery win that is unlikely to happen.

Normally I wouldn't indulge in two beer in a day but I am down 25 pounds on my weight loss routine and on time to hit my goal of 50 pounds this year and, since I am feeling lazy I think I will crack another tonight and, perhaps, another after that.

My middle daughter is house hunting and one of the homes they are looking at is across the street and down the block a couple of hundred yards and I can think of nothing finer than to have her close so I hope that works out. It would thrill me to have one of the young grandchildren, Silas in this case, so close he could just come and go.

Two neighborhood cats just wandered into the yard at the same time, saw each other, stared, and are now sitting beside each other under my truck. Cat socialization?

McDonalds is having a a couple of weeks of selling lobster rolls starting Wednesday. I am not a fan of McDonalds but you would be hard pressed to screw up lobster rolls. I am fairly certain that Mom, Dad, and I will be eating three meals a day there until the special ends. Tess is working and will miss it. Screw Nanay.

Sunday we will be having our regular, annual Father's Day lobster fest in my parents back yard. I can hardly wait. If there is anything better than an orgy of butter, beer and lobster I have never heard of it.

I am within striking distance of finishing the latest book I have been working my way through. If we eat late, and since Tess is still on Skype to the Philippines I assume late is the operative word, I should make it. I have three on the go at the moment but have put the other two aside to finish this, the more interesting of the three, a biography of Dietrich Von Hildebrand. Not to be confused with Dietrich Bonhoeffer although their stories are similar. You are excused if you have never heard of Von Hildebrand but just barely excused.

I will post a review tomorrow. Well, actually, no. I don't really do reviews on the books I read. They are more like commentaries.

In any event it was the reading of this book that prompted me to write this blog posting which has grown to inexcusable lengths. Blame that on the beer. It looses the tongue.

I was enjoying this book so very much and suddenly I was lonely. Powerfully lonely. I am betting there are but a handful of people in the world, comparatively speaking, who have read this or anything else I read. It is a brilliant book but would doubtless bore the stuffing out of anyone else I know and most I don't know.

I have written at four forums that collapsed. Then at Yahoo 360, Multiply, Blogger, and here. My original intent was to find like minded people to discuss books with. That has never happened. Thus my loneliness.

I will write more about that tomorrow. This is too long now. That beer is calling me. I want to finish this book which no one cares about.

There are days I could cheerfully strangle Tess' mother and do the resulting twenty-five to life with a smile on my face. Today was one of them.

Today I had to take her to the doctor because, once again, Nanay waited to the last moment to tell us she was running out of medication and Tess was not available to take her.

This was to be an easy visit. In and out. Renew the 'scrips, get a form for future blood work, and be out the door.

I should have known it wouldn't be that easy. Tess' mother is a hypochondriac. She is pill happy. She loves doctors and the attention they lavish on her. Of course they lavish it on her. They get paid for it. Handsomely. And in our case, from the public through.

At the last moment he decided to check her blood pressure. It was quite high and he said so. Naturally Nanay freaked. I asked him, "White coat syndrome?" He replied "Most likely." (It is well known that a patients blood pressure can rise dramatically simply with the act of a doctor checking it.)

The doctor was unconcerned. He told me to check her blood pressure a couple of times over the next couple of weeks and if it stayed high to bring her back but otherwise not to worry.

Nanay wants to worry. It is her ticket to more doctor visits, more pills, and, she thinks, a different diet. She has already tried to tell Tess the high blood pressure is because we eat too much meat and she needs more fish.

Horseshit.

The price of Asian fish is sky high but that is all, and I mean all, she would eat at Tess' brothers. Yes, they can afford it. We can't.

When I was younger I was known to have a very, very short fuse and a red hot temper. I have a grip on that now. In fact, I have more patience than most people but Nanay nearly lit that fuse today.

I rounded on her. No, your high blood pressure is not caused by your diet and we ar enot buying more fish. Your blood pressure is probably not high, I told her, and the doctor is unconcerned. I told her if she was worried about it she could turn the fucking television off, get off her fat ass, and move some.

Aarrgghh.

I hate that woman. I truly hate her.

At the coast she saw Shaun taking Omega 3-6-9 which had been recommended to him by his doctor because Shaun has a heart condition. Nanay decided she had to have it to. Shaun gave her a bottle just to shut her up. Now we are stuck with buying it. Today she had to have more. Life brand was on sale with a bottle of 200 each 1200 mg capsules costing five dollars less than than the 100 each bottle of Weber she wanted ... wanted because that was the bottle Shaun gave her.

I happen to know that Shaun had given her a Weber bottle he had filled with no-name brand from Costco.

I put my foot down and told her "No." They were the same damn thing just a different bottle.

I wish I could convince Nanay that powdered Cadmium was a necessary antidote to high blood pressure. Nothing like a little heavy metal poisoning to shut her up ... permanently.

My mother is facing a very serious, possibly life ending health issue and we are waiting for more tests to be done on that. (No, do not ask. I do not want to talk about it.) Tess' mother is as healthy as a horse, unfortunately, and wants to be sick.

Sunday, 14 June 2015

I have been listening to various speakers, reading a few opinion pieces, keeping an ear to the ground. The talk is that there is a backlash coming, that it is building, that ordinary people have had enough of the progressive push and have started to push back.

Bucking the trend of states that have caved on religious liberty due to fear of reprisals from gay activists, Michigan passed a law Thursday offering protections to religious adoption agencies from being forced to place children in the homes of same-sex couples.

The law had broad support in the Republican controlled legislature and was signed on Thursday by Governor Rick Snyder, a Republican.

Snyder has voiced opposition to a broader religious liberty bill statewide that mirrors the federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act signed by former President Bill Clinton. RFRA protections, once non-controversial and bipartisan now face the ire of gay activists.

Some Catholic and evangelical adoption agencies in Illinois have already closed their doors instead of complying with state law that they claim violates their conscience.

The law requires that faith-based agencies give a list of adoption services that cater to same-sex couples if they can't help them do to conscience issues.The ACLU says it will explore all options to challenge the legality of the new law based on "discrimination." Private and religious adoption agencies in Michigan are eligible for and some do receive state funds. Proponents of the bill say a diversity of adoption providers only increases the opportunity that children are adopted by a loving family.

"The state has made significant progress in finding more forever homes for Michigan kids in recent years and that wouldn't be possible without the public-private partnerships that facilitate the adoption process," Snyder declared in a statement . "We are focused on ensuring that as many children are adopted to as many loving families as possible regardless of their makeup."

In his statement, Snyder said that last year 85 percent of children in the state foster care system were adopted, up from 70 percent in 2011.

The head of the largest adoption agency in the country, Bethany Christian Services, is based in Grand Rapids, Mich. In 2012 alone, the agency dealt with 188,000 people who seek adoptions, family guidance, and who are in the foster care system. CEO Bill Blacquiere spoke in 2013 on the threat faith-based adoption agencies face without religious liberty protection.

"There is growing societal pressure to confine Christian liberty," said Blacquiere, "to just a few areas such as our house of worship, family life, and personal devotions."Blacquiere is concerned too about federal measures being pushed to effectively strip religious liberty from faith-based adoption agencies.

In a statement regarding the new law, which Bethany Christian Services supports, Blacquiere declared the legislation "doesn't restrict anyone from participating in foster care or adoption, but it does preserve for faith-based agencies the freedom to be faithful to our convictions."

The Human Rights Campaign, which has worked closely with the ACLU of Michigan and Equality Michigan, called the new law "extreme.""Governor Rick Snyder has proven today that he has utter disdain for the welfare of children in Michigan and that he cares only about empowering backwards discrimination," said HRC President Chad Griffin. "This legislation keeps children in need out of the loving homes they deserve, and it sets this great state back decades."In their opposition to the legislation Human Rights Campaign declared the law "would also allow a religious adoption agency from a non-Christian faith to deny service to a straight, Christian couple."In June, a possible Supreme Court ruling legalizing same-sex marriage nationwide could further erode existing religious liberty protection laws.

This is certainly welcome news. Constitutional freedom and the rule of law is still working in parts of the United States although I am certain most reading this will be simply aghast at those rednecks passing a law like this - a law that protects the religious freedom enshrined in our Constitution and reiterated by Congress in RRFA.

It is just a sorry state of affairs that this state had to reiterate it once again.

North Carolina's Republican-controlled legislature has overturned a veto from their Republican governor on a bill that allows magistrates to refuse to perform gay marriages if they have a religious or moral objection.

After the state Senate had voted to overturn the veto, the House confirmed the veto by a vote of 69-41 on Thursday. The law takes effect immediately.

"Gay rights groups and Democrats who opposed the bill said after the vote that litigation challenging the law was likely to come soon," reported ABC 11.

"Republicans supporting the measure said federal laws provided religious accommodations to government officials, in keeping with the U.S. and state constitutions."

In May 2012, voters in North Carolina overwhelmingly passed an amendment to their state constitution that banned gay marriage.

Last October, a judge struck down the amendment and another judge in the state issued a similar ruling that same month regarding other suits against it.

In response to the legal decision, many state magistrates resigned from their official position rather than perform same-sex weddings.

Introduced in late January, Senate Bill 2 was primarily sponsored by Republican State Senator Phil Berger, who also serves as the Senate's president pro tempore.

"Every magistrate has the right to recuse from performing all lawful marriages under this Chapter based upon any sincerely held religious objection," read SB 2 in part.

"Every assistant register of deeds and deputy register of deeds has the right to recuse from issuing all lawful marriage licenses under this Chapter based upon any sincerely held religious objection."

The Legislature passed SB 2 only to have Governor Pat McCrory veto the legislation in late May. In a statement, Gov. McCrory argued that "we are a nation and a state of laws"

"Whether it is the president, governor, mayor, a law enforcement officer, or magistrate, no public official who voluntarily swears to support and defend the Constitution and to discharge all duties of their office should be exempt from upholding that oath," stated McCrory.

Regarding the successful overturning of the veto, the pro-traditional marriage group National Organization for Marriage released a statement praising the legislature's move.

"This is a huge victory for supporters of marriage and was brought about because of the efforts of NOM's members and others working in support of allies in North Carolina including the NC Values Coalition," stated NOM in Thursday.

"It was outrageous that Governor McCrory, a Republican, would veto this legislation and we will work with allies to hold him accountable."

The overturning of the veto comes as the nation waits for a decision from the U.S. Supreme Court on the constitutionality of state level bans on same-sex marriage.

Saturday, 13 June 2015

A Good Read was a PBS series that featured Maine writers. One of those who appeared on this series was my Uncle "Deed," my father's eldest brother, Gerald E. Lewis noted Maine outdoorsman and author of Up Here In Maine , My Big Buck , How To Talk Yankee , and So Long, Scout . He was also an educator and a Fulbright Fellow.

We have had a copy of this interview on VHS for some time but I refused to watch it. I knew it would upset me since nearly all of my extended family is gone now.

I came upon this on the Internet a while back, however, and sat down to watch it. As I suspected, it gutted me. This is unadulterated Jerry. I miss him very much.

I wish I could embed this but I cannot.

You may watch it HERE if you are so inclined. At 16 seconds into the video there is a picture of two young boys. My father is on the left, Jerry is on the right.